Author Topic: Invasion not so succexy  (Read 948 times)

Offline Nash

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 11705
      • http://sbm.boomzoom.org/
Invasion not so succexy
« on: December 23, 2004, 09:44:09 PM »
Are successful invasions of foreign countries even possible anymore? They used to be - we know that. But in that era, folks were listening to Benny Goodman or whatever. A whole different world. The word 'guerilla' meant exotic animal.

So okay... Iraq. Call me a pessimist, but I just don't see it happening. Don't get yer shorts in a knot - I want it to... because at this point it really needs to work - but, I just have my doubts.

Because I'm trying to see it from the Iraqi perspective. Or more specifically - from the standpoint of the US invading Canada and trying to overthrow the government and setting up their own here. It would be pretty damned strange... and I'm not so sure we'd buy into it.

Just for a sec... lets put the beavar polite Canadian etc. jokes aside...

Our country probably most resembles the US out of anywhere. The transition would be a snap. And frankly, I'm not sure that anyone would even notice. You certainly wouldn't see beheadings or any of that weird extremist mullah or whatever crap.

But it would be offensive as hell. And I kinda have to think that we'd do something about it... whatever that would be.

Hhm... lets tighten this thing up a bit.

Okay... The US runs out of oil and water and trees and whatever else but has plenty enough to fight a war. Canada has only enough resources to service itself so it tells the US to take a hike. Not only that, but a member of parliament steps on a GW doll.

WHATEVER.

The US decides to invade out of national interests or suspected WMD or just for a laff.

again... WHATEVER.

So lets try and play that scenario out.

My military knowledge... like pretty much all of my knowledge, is teh suck. But in an attempt to get the ball rolling, here's a few sort of vague realities:

In the US' favour:

- A crushing military vs no real formal opposition.
- A familiar environment; cities are the same, no deserts etc.
- A population that thinks the same... no berserker moves in the name of Allah.
- etc... (fill in the blanks)

In Canada's favour:

- Vast terrain... a huge country. Millions of people.
- Boatloads of privately owned guns (no rocket launchers though..)
- An educated citizenry. Our 1st year engineering students alone would probably geek out for the opportunity to make IEDs seem like Tonka toys.
- Familiarity with rank structure and probability of good leadership with chain of command (unlike what we're seeing in Iraq).
And... etc. Again, fill in the blanks.

Now... lets assume that Canadians as a whole (or in part?) decide to fight back. To go Wolverines (become terrorist insurgents) on the US' arse.

What happens? What would it look like? Would it work?

Offline FUNKED1

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6866
      • http://soldatensender.blogspot.com/
Invasion not so succexy
« Reply #1 on: December 23, 2004, 09:52:03 PM »
It can be done, but not if "media approval" and "PC" and "global test" are priorities.  It requires a level of brutality that western nations aren't willing to dish out.  That probably would be a good criterion in deciding whether to invade or not.  Is the problem severe enough that we are justified in getting medieval on dey ass?  If not, then stay the hell out.

Offline Nash

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 11705
      • http://sbm.boomzoom.org/
Invasion not so succexy
« Reply #2 on: December 23, 2004, 09:56:28 PM »
Yup I agree... I shoulda mentioned that.

No nukes.

If nukes? Yeah - we'd capitulate faster than... I don't know what.

But nukes are so taboo these days. If they aren't getting used in Iraq, they aren't getting used anywhere. So lets leave those out.

Not to mention the fact that pretty much all of our cities are some mere hours drive away from yours. Right on the border. Nukes might not be the smartest play should ye have the guts to go ahead and use them.
« Last Edit: December 23, 2004, 10:01:20 PM by Nash »

Offline FUNKED1

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6866
      • http://soldatensender.blogspot.com/
Invasion not so succexy
« Reply #3 on: December 23, 2004, 09:59:00 PM »
You can still get pretty brutal without nukes.  Ho Chi Minh, Hitler, Tito, they knew how to get the job done.

Offline Lizking

  • Parolee
  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2502
Invasion not so succexy
« Reply #4 on: December 23, 2004, 10:02:58 PM »
So how many sucessful invasions of another counrty have there been in the last 100 years?  None?

Offline Nash

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 11705
      • http://sbm.boomzoom.org/
Invasion not so succexy
« Reply #5 on: December 23, 2004, 10:03:52 PM »
But you think 21st Century Canadians would fall for that kind of crap? I just think those days are long gone. Nobody here would set foot on a train even if offered tickets to Disneyworld.

People back then were used to doing what they were told. Not so much like that anymore.
« Last Edit: December 23, 2004, 10:08:14 PM by Nash »

Offline FUNKED1

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6866
      • http://soldatensender.blogspot.com/
Invasion not so succexy
« Reply #6 on: December 23, 2004, 10:04:18 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by Lizking
So how many sucessful invasions of another counrty have there been in the last 100 years?  None?

If you exclude outside military intervention, there have been dozens if not hundreds.

Offline Nash

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 11705
      • http://sbm.boomzoom.org/
Invasion not so succexy
« Reply #7 on: December 23, 2004, 10:06:35 PM »
How many since WW2?

Korea? No... 'Nam? No....

I'm not talking foreign influenced coups... but real-bonafied-here's-yer-brand-new-government type invasions?

Maybe that can still happen... but... well that's what I'm asking.

Offline Airhead

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3369
      • http://www.ouchytheclown.com
Invasion not so succexy
« Reply #8 on: December 23, 2004, 10:07:21 PM »
Nash, we don't need to invade Canada- we already own the place.

Offline Nash

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 11705
      • http://sbm.boomzoom.org/
Invasion not so succexy
« Reply #9 on: December 23, 2004, 10:08:28 PM »
har har

Offline NUKE

  • Persona Non Grata
  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8599
      • Arizona Greens
Invasion not so succexy
« Reply #10 on: December 23, 2004, 10:08:45 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by Nash
How many since WW2?

Korea? No... 'Nam? No....

I'm not talking foreign influenced coups... but real-bonafied-here's-yer-brand-new-government type invasions?

Maybe that can still happen... but... well that's what I'm asking.


Vietnam. The North won and brought communism to the south.

Offline Nash

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 11705
      • http://sbm.boomzoom.org/
Invasion not so succexy
« Reply #11 on: December 23, 2004, 10:12:15 PM »
But Nuke, that's sort of akin to Russia invading the US because they didn't want to see the Republicans win... and then the Republicans ended up sweeping the US.

Different.

Offline Lizking

  • Parolee
  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2502
Invasion not so succexy
« Reply #12 on: December 23, 2004, 10:12:32 PM »
If you exclude outside governments, it isn't an invasion, it is a civil war.  How many countries have been invaded and assimilated into the parent country?  Vietnam is iffy, since they were originally a single country.

None that I know of.

Offline Rolex

  • AH Training Corps
  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3285
Invasion not so succexy
« Reply #13 on: December 23, 2004, 10:46:18 PM »
I don't think there has been a successful invasion since the new large maps have been introduced.

Offline Octavius

  • Skinner Team
  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6651
Invasion not so succexy
« Reply #14 on: December 23, 2004, 10:47:07 PM »
I would think invasion and assimilation are two seperate things.  I say that falls into the category of 'conquests' and not just 'intervention.'  Are we talking about no holds barred Roman expansion or the extremely limited [western] actions of the past 54 years?

Like Funked said, it can certainly be done, but not with today's limitations.

but... why?  Killing, conquering, mopping up... other than to exterminate an idea.  I would like to say mankind is progressing beyond that primitive state.  A shame a few ultra melons have a death grip on ignorance.
octavius
Fat Drunk BasTards (forum)

"bastard coated bastards with bastard filling?  delicious!"
Guest of the ++Blue Knights++[/size]